Re: Geology Question (KRS related)


"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:gl7du1hvtrj4olcmjhu6pbqnf2a1be8t3j@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 09:53:08 -0500, "Steve Marcus"
<smarcus_spamout_@xxxxxxx> wrote:

This is a general difference between us. When there are gaps in the
data I tend to fill it with '?' but you seem to substitute an 'X'. The
fact that I withhold rejection of a hypothesis doesn't mean that I
accept it.

First, you really ought to slow down when you read. I just finished
saying
that I'll accept data filling in the gaps regardless of source. I have
repeatedly used the same ? for data gaps in the Nielsen/Wolter work
(although what use the symbol X would imply escapes me).

'X' means crossed out - there is no evidence. The '?' means I don't
know what the evidence is.

Second, I don't think that your posts distinguish between withholding
rejection of a hypothesis and accepting it. For example, from:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.archaeology/msg/beec0b5626d64594?dmode=source&hl=en

or

http://tinyurl.com/d8gcm

"Apart from that, Scott wolter's work seems to have established the age of
the KRS as being +2 centuries at the time of discovery. That too is
important."

In the context of the discussion in that thread, I don't think that
statement strongly indicates that you do not accept Wolter's hypothesis;
certainly without filling in the blank left by the word "seems", one
cannot
come away with anything other than that you strongly believe Wolter to be
correct. There's at least one subsequent post in that thread in which you
claim to be "impartial", but your entire posting history in
sci.archaeology
demonstrates to for you, "impartial" means "I accept the conclusion that
I've preselected and await evidence that it's wrong."

The use of the word 'seems' should be interpreted as meaning that
'Apart from that, Scott Wolter's work [gives the appearance of having]
established the age of the KRS as being +2 centuries at the time of
discovery.' No possible interpretation of 'seems' can lead you to the
conclusion that I meant 'Apart from that, Scott wolter's work [has]
established the age of the KRS as being +2 centuries at the time of
discovery.'

This highlights the point I was trying to make above. I was implying
room for doubt. You want to interpret my statement as an expression of
an absolute opinion. Well, I'm sorry, but it wasn't.

LOL out loud. You have been dragging your feet and question my skepticism
re Wolter's work simply because just a careful reading of the book shows
that there is "room for doubt" insofar as what's been set forth in the book.

So yes, given your total posting history, I'll stand by my comment: when
you think the evidence is on your side, you brook no dissent, and when the
evidence appears to be against the side you favor, you'll question and
question and question even in the face of the most overwhelming of
evidentiary showings. You'll have to forgive me if that sometimes rankles
me; you assert that your profession demands skepticism, and that you use it
often in the service of your clients, yet you frequently abandon all
pretense of skepticism. As an attorney, trained to evaluate evidence from
all sides and angles and to take a skeptical view of evidence, I frequently
am the subject of abuse on the grounds that attorneys deserve to be abused.

We should just learn to take each other as we find him.




Eric Stevens


Steve
--
The above posting is neither a legal opinion nor legal advice,
because we do not have an attorney-client relationship, and
should not be construed as either. This posting does not
represent the opinion of my employer, but is merely my personal
view. To reply, delete _spamout_ and replace with the numeral 3


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Leopard: System Requirements, the Answer
    ... You have almost no posting history, ... Argument fails. ... taken as evidence of truthfulness you are delusional. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: Use Natural Remedies and Treatments for the Flu
    ... there is no evidence that "Jeff" is a doctor. ... And reviewing ... posting history, there is no evidence that he is correct about anything. ...
    (misc.health.alternative)
  • Re: Use Natural Remedies and Treatments for the Flu
    ... And reviewing his ... posting history, there is no evidence that he is correct about anything. ... If he were a doctor, he would know that N-acetyl cysteine (a ...
    (misc.health.alternative)
  • Re: Leopard: System Requirements, the Answer
    ... You have almost no posting history, ... Argument fails. ... taken as evidence of truthfulness you are delusional. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.system)
  • Re: Origins and Mental Activity
    ... Some ideas have more evidence to ... my skepticism remains because no evidence has been presented. ... of a genetic system would be the holy grail of abiogenesis, ... allowed to create a word) believe life started with DNA. ...
    (talk.origins)
Quantcast